8 ms·

To any Google Employees reading this. Don't worry! There are SEVERAL ways you can reduce any cognitive dissonance you might be experiencing as you read more abo

To any Google Employees reading this. Don't worry! There are SEVERAL ways you can reduce any cognitive dissonance you might be experiencing as you read more about the evils your company is committing : + rationalization of your own behavior : "I'm not doing this work...I'm working on projects that help people. And ads. But ads are pretty neutral compared to bombing people." + rationalization of others' behavior : "Bombing people isn't evil, since it's helping the military kill MORE _bad guys_ and LESS good guys. And gals. and children." + change your thoughts about yourself : "Maybe I'm not as good of a person as I thought I was..." [note : this one might be hardest to do!] + change your own behavior : Quit Google, or even better organize your fellow workers into some form of collective action (strike!) to remake the company into something that better fits your values and ethics.

flatline 8y ago
Or accept the reality that we live in a world that feels the need to kill people. I think it would be swell to not need a military but the reality is that we do. If you have qualms about working for Google as a defense contractor, consider the implications of living in the US (or in all likelihood wherever you happen to reside). Can you justify paying your taxes? Can you justify voting for one of a handful of candidates for federal government, all of whom are likely to support some form of military action or other? If a hostile foreign power was to invade your country, what would you want the response to be? To what ends and what efforts should we support the military? There are many ethically questionable choices we take for granted, especially those of us that live in the West. Everything we consume has a taint of human exploitation, environmental damage, contributes to oppressive regimes that murder people, etc. Where does it stop? On the other hand, it sounds like the work Google was doing here was to improve the relative safety of autonomous drone strikes. Oh, but if these strikes remained risky and unreliable, we wouldn’t do them! Believe me, there are a dozen other large defense contractors out there that will implement this if Google doesn’t, so it’s not like it’s a binary proposition. My point is, working for Google is not the right target on which to pin arguments for or against the ethics of autonomous drone strikes.
- fakescience 8y ago
  Yes, the arguments you outline would also be ways to reduce cognitive dissonance as well ("if we didn't do it, others would"). I don't think Google would stop all wars by not contributing to this project. But Google, and the employees who work at Google, has power - a kind of power that's very, very different from my power as an individual when paying taxes or when voting for a federal employee (behaviors that create dissonance for me because they contribute to the war machine). I think that power can, and should, be used to prevent wars - not to make them "cleaner". The small attempt at organizing protests made by some employees at the company was a good step, but the only one I have heard of (maybe there have been others?) and I want the people who have the most access to power to start thinking about what they are doing and trying to make more positive changes. Consume less. Be more mindful of environmental damage. Speak out against the oppressive regimes that help murder people.
  - flatline 8y ago
    I basically agree with the last points. As to the drone strikes, I believe there is potential there for decent things. Who is to say these would not grant the power to stop a war by executing key individuals in a scenario where a manned strike would be prohibitive? And yet there is a clear moral hazard of facilitating murder. I’m not wise enough to see where the balance lies. I choose not to work on projects like that but I have trouble condemning some of these things out of hand.
    - fakescience 8y ago
      Yeah, I think we have a fundamental difference in our beliefs about the effectiveness of violence (i.e. assassination via drones) to promote world peace. Hard to know what wars have been prevented via assassination, but if you might look into all the evidence of violence continuing or escalating after assassinations (how many "heads" of ISIS have been killed in drone strikes? and check out all the US activity in Latin America...). But that discussion goes beyond the graveyard of a hacker news comments section. In any case, thanks for the thoughtful responses.
    - 8y ago
jadedhacker 8y ago
If Google employees strike over this, we must find ways to show solidarity with them. An end to the war machine is within our power!
globuous 8y ago
Sure. But then, if you live in the "west", please realize the cost of turning on your light bulb or driving your car or wearing your shoes, or turning on the AC, or buying frozen meat. Realize the cost our lifestyle imposes on people elsewhere. The regimes that are protected and the lives we ruin in exchange for us being able to live the lifestyle that we have. Please don't make me say what I didn't. I'm just asking, as a non googler, am I much better than someone working at google on some of their darker project ? Objectively, everytime I do one of the things I listed above, I kill more people. My point being, your 4 points don't only apply to google employees. Indeed, at the very least, I feel they also apply to me, a non google, chillin at my house with AC and cold water. I pick your third bullet point. Because 1 would be lying to myself, I don't believe in 2, and I'm too weak to pick 4: I won't stop using my AC. I conclude I must be a much worst person I thought I was. On to watching netflix, I need to know what happens next in this one very important show.
- azag0 8y ago
  I’ll just copy-paste a comment (not mine) from a different subthread: “This all-or-nothing approach to morality is stupid. Just because not every decision in your life may be 100% morally justifiable, that does not mean “throw all ethics over board”.”
  - ihsw2 8y ago
    This further reinforces the notion that the modern left has embraced essentialism, moralization, and Utopian ideology: * reducing people to (for example and more commonly than ever) ethnic and religious identities * turning every issue into a moral issue where decisions are separated into right and wrong with a distinct lack of nuance and thoughtful consideration * attacking those that don't share in your Utopian ideology as irredeemable sinners that must be isolated and neutralized, lest they detract from the overarching "perfect future" The top-most comment in this thread is obviously an extremist that lacks any interest in critically examining the multiple variables that have brought us to this situation and instead reduces it to "the American government is evil and anyone that works with it is evil by association." There are ways to affect the direction of this country (and of Google) without resorting to wholesale rejection of it on a basic level. We are entering a dangerous territory where pogroms and cannibalization of moderates are the norm, and where extremists of all stripes are given a platform with violent oppression imposed on those calling for moderation.
jrs95 8y ago
Honestly anyone who pays U.S. taxes is contributing to this. So if any of you really give a shit I guess you should figure out a way to either leave and go somewhere more morally acceptable, or start living off of the smallest possible amount of taxable income so you can avoid contributing to the military. But hardly anyone is actually going to do that. Because as hard as you try, you care about your lifestyle more than what the military is up to.
ransom1538 8y ago
+ I choose ignorance. “Flying armed drones being trained to think. I can’t see anything going wrong here
nerdponx 8y ago
The convenient part is that many Google employees are already experts at 1-3, since they've been working on mass public surveillance for years.
Eridrus 8y ago
Alternatively: Military decisions (in the US) are already overseen and approved by political leaders and they can make judgements on a case-by-case basis, rather than blanket war=good/bad. The US has not had a great track record here, even in my lifetime, but in a world where our adversaries are not going to have these same qualms, I think it is necessary for the US to build this technology, and if you accept that it is necessary for someone to build it, I think holding your nose and saying you want to be as far away from it as possible seems hypocritical.

flatline 8y ago

Or accept the reality that we live in a world that feels the need to kill people. I think it would be swell to not need a military but the reality is that we do. If you have qualms about working for Google as a defense contractor, consider the implications of living in the US (or in all likelihood wherever you happen to reside). Can you justify paying your taxes? Can you justify voting for one of a handful of candidates for federal government, all of whom are likely to support some form of military action or other? If a hostile foreign power was to invade your country, what would you want the response to be? To what ends and what efforts should we support the military? There are many ethically questionable choices we take for granted, especially those of us that live in the West. Everything we consume has a taint of human exploitation, environmental damage, contributes to oppressive regimes that murder people, etc. Where does it stop? On the other hand, it sounds like the work Google was doing here was to improve the relative safety of autonomous drone strikes. Oh, but if these strikes remained risky and unreliable, we wouldn’t do them! Believe me, there are a dozen other large defense contractors out there that will implement this if Google doesn’t, so it’s not like it’s a binary proposition. My point is, working for Google is not the right target on which to pin arguments for or against the ethics of autonomous drone strikes.

fakescience 8y ago
Yes, the arguments you outline would also be ways to reduce cognitive dissonance as well ("if we didn't do it, others would"). I don't think Google would stop all wars by not contributing to this project. But Google, and the employees who work at Google, has power - a kind of power that's very, very different from my power as an individual when paying taxes or when voting for a federal employee (behaviors that create dissonance for me because they contribute to the war machine). I think that power can, and should, be used to prevent wars - not to make them "cleaner". The small attempt at organizing protests made by some employees at the company was a good step, but the only one I have heard of (maybe there have been others?) and I want the people who have the most access to power to start thinking about what they are doing and trying to make more positive changes. Consume less. Be more mindful of environmental damage. Speak out against the oppressive regimes that help murder people.
- flatline 8y ago
  I basically agree with the last points. As to the drone strikes, I believe there is potential there for decent things. Who is to say these would not grant the power to stop a war by executing key individuals in a scenario where a manned strike would be prohibitive? And yet there is a clear moral hazard of facilitating murder. I’m not wise enough to see where the balance lies. I choose not to work on projects like that but I have trouble condemning some of these things out of hand.
  - fakescience 8y ago
    Yeah, I think we have a fundamental difference in our beliefs about the effectiveness of violence (i.e. assassination via drones) to promote world peace. Hard to know what wars have been prevented via assassination, but if you might look into all the evidence of violence continuing or escalating after assassinations (how many "heads" of ISIS have been killed in drone strikes? and check out all the US activity in Latin America...). But that discussion goes beyond the graveyard of a hacker news comments section. In any case, thanks for the thoughtful responses.
  - 8y ago

jadedhacker 8y ago

If Google employees strike over this, we must find ways to show solidarity with them. An end to the war machine is within our power!

globuous 8y ago

Sure. But then, if you live in the "west", please realize the cost of turning on your light bulb or driving your car or wearing your shoes, or turning on the AC, or buying frozen meat. Realize the cost our lifestyle imposes on people elsewhere. The regimes that are protected and the lives we ruin in exchange for us being able to live the lifestyle that we have. Please don't make me say what I didn't. I'm just asking, as a non googler, am I much better than someone working at google on some of their darker project ? Objectively, everytime I do one of the things I listed above, I kill more people. My point being, your 4 points don't only apply to google employees. Indeed, at the very least, I feel they also apply to me, a non google, chillin at my house with AC and cold water. I pick your third bullet point. Because 1 would be lying to myself, I don't believe in 2, and I'm too weak to pick 4: I won't stop using my AC. I conclude I must be a much worst person I thought I was. On to watching netflix, I need to know what happens next in this one very important show.

azag0 8y ago
I’ll just copy-paste a comment (not mine) from a different subthread: “This all-or-nothing approach to morality is stupid. Just because not every decision in your life may be 100% morally justifiable, that does not mean “throw all ethics over board”.”
- ihsw2 8y ago
  This further reinforces the notion that the modern left has embraced essentialism, moralization, and Utopian ideology: * reducing people to (for example and more commonly than ever) ethnic and religious identities * turning every issue into a moral issue where decisions are separated into right and wrong with a distinct lack of nuance and thoughtful consideration * attacking those that don't share in your Utopian ideology as irredeemable sinners that must be isolated and neutralized, lest they detract from the overarching "perfect future" The top-most comment in this thread is obviously an extremist that lacks any interest in critically examining the multiple variables that have brought us to this situation and instead reduces it to "the American government is evil and anyone that works with it is evil by association." There are ways to affect the direction of this country (and of Google) without resorting to wholesale rejection of it on a basic level. We are entering a dangerous territory where pogroms and cannibalization of moderates are the norm, and where extremists of all stripes are given a platform with violent oppression imposed on those calling for moderation.

jrs95 8y ago

Honestly anyone who pays U.S. taxes is contributing to this. So if any of you really give a shit I guess you should figure out a way to either leave and go somewhere more morally acceptable, or start living off of the smallest possible amount of taxable income so you can avoid contributing to the military. But hardly anyone is actually going to do that. Because as hard as you try, you care about your lifestyle more than what the military is up to.

ransom1538 8y ago

+ I choose ignorance. “Flying armed drones being trained to think. I can’t see anything going wrong here

nerdponx 8y ago

The convenient part is that many Google employees are already experts at 1-3, since they've been working on mass public surveillance for years.

Eridrus 8y ago

Alternatively: Military decisions (in the US) are already overseen and approved by political leaders and they can make judgements on a case-by-case basis, rather than blanket war=good/bad. The US has not had a great track record here, even in my lifetime, but in a world where our adversaries are not going to have these same qualms, I think it is necessary for the US to build this technology, and if you accept that it is necessary for someone to build it, I think holding your nose and saying you want to be as far away from it as possible seems hypocritical.